‘Maths’ VS prejudice [basis for an ethic]

Philosophy Forums Philosophy
1

‘Maths’ VS prejudice [basis for an ethic]

An inconsequential back story…
I was at a public place some time ago, where a black chap was having a go at a lady who was giving her baby coke-cola, as i left i overheard him saying ‘fat white girls are always like that’.
Problem was, he was from hackney, London where he probably met a few white females who were like that and assumedly considered there to be great mass of that class of people. However, i was from the country and i know lots of fat white women and none of them were in the classification he had denoted.

If we envision of a kind of maths where the cardinality of information is of ‘classes’[groups, collections, collectives etc] instead of numerical integers; wherever you take a group of humans or denote cardinality [an act of] to a universal or collective, you will always be able to divide them mathematically into further groups. Then there will always be the classes within the group which differ, this because you are giving an essentially classless entity [human beings] a denomination which differentiates them from the un/non-classified set. This is a dualistic action and as such manifests further division, because you have to first add cardinality giving rise to further division/cardinality in the continued application.

In order to justify singularity i.e. Making only one class not requiring further division, there has to be no contrasting or contradictory information. However in making a class you have already done that, and so there will always be the contrast you had to draw to make the classification to begin with. See, that’s how duality works.

is there a class of people or things which cannot be further divided?

Does the process of classification and attribution of values itself create classes, where mathematically they can be divided ad infinitum and hence are no classes?

I.e. There are no classes. Prejudice is always flawed at root, because it cannot have a basis due to the cardinalising maths. Prejudice requires the belief in classes which are always false.

= 1 basis for ethics is that prejudice is always flawed, due to its dualistic inception and processing.

Only doesn’t work when you stop looking for contrasts #-o :mrgreen: ~ a kind of blindness, that e.g. racists and male chauvinists have.
_

2

Yes there is a human class that cannot be divided, i.e. basic human dignity that is priceless and non-negotiable.

One rule that can manifest out of this basic human element is the Golden Rule.
One form: Do not do to others what you do not want others to do to you.

If the black guy understand the live the above rule he would not say what he had said.

3

Compared to the idea that humanity will one day be just another geological layer in the rock.
You need comparatives to draw such conclusions!
Not to mention that ‘basic human dignity that is priceless and non-negotiable’, is surely based in the idea of equal worth ~ which derives from non-prejudice. So my logic supports yours and ultimately isn’t a contradiction to it.